Justice has been served from day one. There is a process to go through instead of jumping to emotional, hysterical conclusions based on one's preconceptions. Justice is not only served when the result is what some people want.

As far as I am concerned, the guy is guilty just for the fact of going around the neighborhood with a loaded gun. It remains to be seen what kind of credible arguments he can come up with to diminish his guilt.

This is a case where he is guilty until he proves himself innocent. His only hope is how much of an excuse can the interpretation of the "stand your ground" law can give him.

I can't believe the special prosecutor went for second degree murder. that is going to be very hard to prove. She should have gone for manslaughter and had a better chance of winning,

The advantage of the 2nd degree murder charge is that it allows Mr. Zimmerman to plea bargain for a manslaughter charge which would negate the need for a lengthy, expensive, emotionally charged trial. Special Prosecutor Angela Corey must feel that the evidence is sufficient to gain a murder conviction or she wouldn't have charged him with it.In my experience prosecutors usually charge defendants with the highest charge they believe the can get a jury to convict that person of.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture."-- Thomas Paine: The Crisis No. V (March 21, 1778)

Justice has been served from day one. There is a process to go through instead of jumping to emotional, hysterical conclusions based on one's preconceptions. Justice is not only served when the result is what some people want.

As far as I am concerned, the guy is guilty just for the fact of going around the neighborhood with a loaded gun. It remains to be seen what kind of credible arguments he can come up with to diminish his guilt.

This is a case where he is guilty until he proves himself innocent. His only hope is how much of an excuse can the interpretation of the "stand your ground" law can give him.

Mr. Zimmerman does not have to prove himself innocent. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture."-- Thomas Paine: The Crisis No. V (March 21, 1778)

Considering the recent cases that have been dismissed in Florida under its “stand your ground” law, I have little confidence that this case will go to trial. I have less confidence that Zimmerman will be convicted or will spend a day in prison on such conviction. Not that I am cynical.

Indeed, considering the recent cases that have been dismissed in under Florida’s “stand your ground” law, I think it would be somewhat unfortunate for this case to go to trial and result in a conviction, if its dismissal (or Zimmerman’s acquittal) could lead to the repeal of these and other NRA-sponsored laws.

Considering the recent cases that have been dismissed in Florida under its “stand your ground” law, I have little confidence that this case will go to trial. I have less confidence that Zimmerman will be convicted or will spend a day in prison on such conviction. Not that I am cynical.

Indeed, considering the recent cases that have been dismissed in under Florida’s “stand your ground” law, I think it would be somewhat unfortunate for this case to go to trial and result in a conviction, if its dismissal (or Zimmerman’s acquittal) could lead to the repeal of these and other NRA-sponsored laws.

I share your lack of confidence in this situation. But, the worst of all worlds would be for Zimmerman to get off but the NRA-sponsored laws that protect the shooter and not the victim don't get repealed, which is what I think is the most likely outcome.